Re: [lac-discuss-en] [At-Large] - Price caps - was: The Case for Regulatory Capture at ICANN | Review Signal Blog
- To: Evan Leibovitch <evan@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [lac-discuss-en] [At-Large] - Price caps - was: The Case for Regulatory Capture at ICANN | Review Signal Blog
- From: Lance Hinds <brainstreetceo@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2019 13:05:52 -0400 Virus-free. www.avg.com
On Sun, 30 Jun 2019 at 04:20, Roberto Gaetano <roberto_gaetano@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Given the entrenchment of social darwinism -- well-expressed by Karl -- deep
inside ICANN's culture, I have serious concerns about its willingness --
let alone ability -- to yield to even the middle ground you suggest. If that is
the case, is even seeking a middle ground worth the effort?
And the alternative is?
I don't know. There seems little more that we can do from the side of
moderation to convince the status quo to yield anything. That's one of the
reasons I have withdrawn from deep participation in ICANN, after a a long time
trying I have concluded that the task looks futile. To me it appears that the
Internet will do what it does best, rerouting around obstacles, including the
obstacle called ICANN. A a result, there is an increasing trend to go beyond
"memorable" domain names. (As Jonathan knows, I wanted that issue to
be front-and-centre in CCT investigations.) One could even make a reasonable
case that Google and Facebook would not be so dominant in the Internet now had
domain names had been usefully deployed. But it's too late to reboot that.
In fact, IMO things have become worse not better. The IANA transition
eliminated ICANN's last shred of external accountability, leaving control
in an "empowered" (100%-pure Doublespeak) community that makes the
Board only really accountable to those inside the bubble. It's no surprise
that voices against ALAC have risen as the level of industry entitlement grows,
seemingly without limit. See threads elsewhere about a new gTLD expansion round
coming, clearly desired by nobody but the domain industry, but coming
nonetheless. IMO, ALAC is utterly powerless to affect change, especially given
its lack of focus. This is why I concentrate my current participation here on
focusing ALAC to understand and advance end-user needs exclusively; it's
our best shot at remaining relevant. In the end, only some kind of external
stimulus will prod ICANN to change course. Unprotected by treaty, I believe
that eventually ICANN will encounter ever-more hostility at the ITU, by
individual states or blocs of states. Or perhaps there will be some event or
action, a scandal that publicly exposes the culture of corruption and/or lack
of public-mindedness. Eventually ICANN's arrogance will push even neutral
players to determine that a change is in order, that even the feared
multilateralism can't be worse than what exists now. What I don't know
is whether ICANN's "Entitled Community" (which is the proper name
for it) will see the threat in time enough to change, or whether it will remain
oblivious and/or defiant right until catastrophic change. I have a genuine
concern about the potential damage to the technical components of ICANN which
generally work well, that would come with an overhaul of the trade/political
components.
This may be an unsatisfying answer, but it's the best that I can conclude.
- Evan
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list
At-Large@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large At-Large Official
Site: http://atlarge.icann.org _______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with
the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website
Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman
link above to change your membership status or configuration, including
unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether
(e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
--
Lance Hinds Chief Technology Officer BrainStreet Group 287 'C' Albert
St. Georgetown Guyana This message contains information that may be
privileged and/or confidential and is the property of BrainStreet Technologies
or BrainStreet Learning. The information contained herein is intended only for
the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and others authorized to
receive it . If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to
read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or take any action in
reliance to the contents of this information or any part thereof and it may be
unlawful to do so. If you receive this message in error, please notify the
sender immediately and delete all copies of this message from your system.
BrainStreet Technologies or BrainStreet Learning are neither liable for the
proper and complete transmission of the information contained in this
communication nor any delay in its receipt.